ML20211G592
| ML20211G592 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 01/16/1987 |
| From: | Logrande M SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY |
| To: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| References | |
| CON-#187-2322 OL-3, NUDOCS 8702250442 | |
| Download: ML20211G592 (12) | |
Text
DOCKET NUf3BER 2, 3 7. L-PROD. P. ImL FAC..
2 s'
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
~-
^
z
- cvuti
- i.s. :
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE MICHAEL A. LoGRANDE Fr
,,[;7 surroLx couNrv ExEcurivE January 16, 1987 Mr. Victor Stello Executive Director for Operations
)
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Mr. Stello:
On December 27, 1986, I took office as the Suffolk County Executive.
I am writing in this capacity to correct two misstatements by you that were reported in the enclosed Newsday article of January 4, 1987.
First, you state that the problems concerning emergency planning for Shoreham "are all a direct result of the lack of participation by state and local governments."
Your statement is unfounded and incorrect.
The emergency planning problems at Shoreham are a direct result of the decision to construct the Shoreham plant where a nuclear power plant does not belong.
That decision was made by LILCO and approved by the NRC.
LILCO and the NRC are thus the ones responsible for the " problems" to which you allude.
l Second, you state, "If there was [ sic] a real emergency, there is no doubt that those people pledged to help protect the public would follow LILCO's plan.
I'm convinced they would do 1
anything to protect the public, and that means following a structured plan.
Unless they have a plan t
we don't know about, that means they would follow LILCO's plan."
i Again, your statement is unfounded and incorrect.
l l
Suffolk County has determined after extensive analyses that under no circumstances would it follow LILCO's emergency plan or work in concert with LILCO to effect an emergency response to an accident at Shoreham.
For your information, enclosed are copies i
G702250442 G70116 PDR ADOCK 05000322 F
PDR H. LEE DENNISON BLDG 5 e
VErERANS MEMORIAL MiGMWAY e
HAUPPAUGE. N.Y. t t 7ee e
(S t 81380 4000
(
i Mr. Victor Stello January 16, 1987 Page 2 of Suffolk County Resolution 111-1983 and the June 23, 1986 statement of the former Suffolk County Executive.
These documents reflect the conscientiousness of the County and provide thoroughly considered bases for the County's determinations.
For the reasons elaborated in the enclosed documents, I
emphasize that as County Executive, I would not use the authority or resources of this government to implement LILCO's emergency plan or to work in concert with LILCO to effect an emergency response to an accident at Shoreham.
Suffolk County has found LILCO's plan to be unworthy and unworkable.
The County would not, and could not, rely on such a discredited plan.
Moreover, in recent years LILCO has repeatedly demonstrated itself to possess poor and untrustworthy judgment.
For example, after holding full hearings, the State Public Service Commission" denied LILCO recovery of $1.3 billion of Shoreham's costs because of LILCO's " imprudence" and " gross mismanagement" during construction of the plant.
The County would not, and could not, rely on the guidance or advice of such a company in an emergency.
If the County did, its citizens could not trust their own government.
Very truly yours,
/f'III hf
% C l
MICHAEL A.
LoGRANDE l
Acting County Executive l
MAL:fmn Enclosures l
]
NEWSPAPERM e W c] w l~ Q = $ l '
DAM PAGE(S) h
.EILCO Plan Chbnges Too Often: FEMA ByJohn Mcdonald Changes are ao frequent in the emergency plan fo'r the Shoreham nuclear power plant that further reviews and exercises ofit are " impractical, and an unwise use oflimit-ed resources," according to a high-ranking ohial of the -
Federal Emergency Management Agency.
In a letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Comm=ian, Dave Mcloughlin. FEMA's deputy asaciate director for state and local programs and support, said that the num-ber of changes - and different proceedings before the NRC " renders it impractical, and an unwise use of limited resources, to continue to perfcrm further reviews of LIILO plans or exercissa under the current unsynch-ronized mannar in which these lacues are being adjudicat-ed." He added that fella will cantinue to provide wit-nesses for NRC hearings on the reviews it has completed.
McLoughlin's letter accompanied the latest FEMA review ofchanges in the long Island IJghting Co. plan.
Asked if the statement meant that FEMA would refuse to conduct further reviews of changes in the LIILO plan, FEMA spokesman Bob Blair dochned to answer directly.
"What we've expressed is frustration with the limited re-sources we have," he said.
LIILO officials said they did not and Mcloughlin's statement to be a complaint about IlILO and referred further questions to FEMA and the NRC. LIILO spokes-man Jim Iois said that the FEMA review is being studied by company of5cials and that many changes in the Shore-ham plan are caused by "the political situation here."
Blair said the Shoreham licenaa'ng case was straining FEMA resources because "we find that the plan is changed before we even comples our review.*
For example, in the latest review,11140 received an acequate rating for having an agreement with a radio station willing to serve as the primary emergency broad.
cast station in the event of a Shoreham accident. But after LIILO submitted its revision for review, WALK radio dropped out of the plan, and a substitute has not been designated.
"There is no other case as complicated as this one," amid Victor Stello, executive director for operations of the hTC, after receiving McImughlin's letter and the FEMA review.
The review fowid 15 " inadequacies," up from six found in the previous review in October 1985. 'lle review a year earlier,in October 1984, found eight. The inadequacies ie.
the latest review include LIILO's plan to motutor only l
drivers in automobiles for radiation rather than both driv.
ers and passengers, and the lack of Arm agreements with
(
support agencies including the Nassau Chapter of the Red l
Cross.
l The Shoreham licensing case is the first before the i
NRC to involve an emergency plan prepared by a utility.
l Such plans ordinarily are prepared by state and local gov-ernment and reviewed by FEMA, which lasues a Ending t
i on whether they provide adequate protection to the public.
LIILO submitted its emergency plan after the state j
and Suffolk County refused to participate in emergency planning. Because the courta have ruled that LIILO has no legal authority to implement its emergency plan, FEMA has said it cannot issue a finding on whether the plan would protect the public.
I The NRC's Stello said the prob! cms concer:Jng emer-gency planning for Shoreham, including the stands taken by WALK and the Nassau Had Cross, "are all a direct result of the lack of participation by state and local gov-ernments. I find it Af!Icult to understand. If there was a real emergency, there is no doubt that those pie pledged to help protact the public would follow O's plan. I;n convinced they would do anything to protect the public, and that means following a structured plan. Un-less they have a plan we don't know about, that means they would follow LIILO'e olan."
Gov. Mario Cuomo ani. lormer Suffolk County Execu-tive Peter F. Cohalan have submitted sworn statements to the NRC saying they would act to protect the bhc in a Shoreham accident, but not by following O's plan, which they claim is unworkable and illegal.
Richard Kessel, executive director of the state Con-l sumer Praesctaen Board and a spohamman for Cuomo on l
the Shoreham isses maad "fbe probiein la you w.t _ _
ate long taland no matter what the sente and esuary were
,to do. De NRC hasteng ta these inery towuse and esahp
.jtnnga f
a w
O' STATEMENT OF SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE PETER F.
COHALAN JUNE 23, 1986 I AM ISSUING THIS STATEMENT TO ENSURE THAT THERE ARE NO MISUNDERSTANDINGS OF MY POSITION WITH RESPECT TO THE SHOREHA NUCLEAR POWER STATION.
I AM PARTICULARLY MOTIVATED TO MAKE THIS STATEMENT BECAUSE LILCO HAS MISSTATED MY POSITION IN EFFORTS PERSUADE FEDERAL AGENCIES TO LICENSE SHOREHAM.LET THE RECORD BE CLEAR:
I AM OPPOSED TO THE LICENSING OF SHOREHAM.
IN FACT, I HAVE NEVER SUPPORTED THE LICENSING OF SHOREHAM FOR COMMERCIAL OPERATION.
ON'MAY 30, 1985, I GAVE QUALIFIED SUPPORT ONLY TO A TEST OF LILCO'S EMERGENCY PLAN ON THE COND THAT THERE WOULD BE PARTICIPATION OF THE SUFFOLK COUNTY t
i GOVERNMENT.
HOWEVER, ON JUNE 10, 1985, THE NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT, AND LATER THE APPELLATE DIVISION AND THE COURT OF t
APPEALS, RULED THAT I COULD NOT CHANGE COUNTY POLICY BY COMMITTING COUNTY PERSONNEL AND RESOURCES TO A TEST.
IN RESPONSE, I WITHDREW MY MAY 30, 1985, POSITION, AND ON NOVEMBER 7,
- 1985, FORMALLY REQUESTED THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NOT TO CONCUCT A TEST OF LILCO'S EMERGENCY PLAN.
ON FEBRUARY 13, 1986, OVER THE OBJECTIONS OF THE COUNTY LEGISLATURE AND MYSELF, LILCO CONDUCTED A TEST OF ITS EMERGENCY PLAN.
I STATED THEN THAT THE EXERCISE AMOUNTED TO " THEATER OF
4
/
THE ABSURD."
THE TEST WAS UNREALISTIC AND WAS CLEARLY DESIGNED TO CONVEY FALSE IMPRESSIONS OF LILCO'S COMPETENCE.
WE ON LONG ISLAND WERE NOT DECEIVED; WE HAVE FIRST-HAND EXPERIENCE WITH LILCO'S LACK OF COMPETENCE -- LET'S NOT FORGET THE $1.35 BILLION IMPRUDENCE FINDING AND LILCO'S RESPONSE TO HURRICANE GI4RIA.
I FEEL THAT THE ONLY SIGNIFICANT ASPECT OF THE FEBRUARY 13 TEST CAME AFTERWARD, WHEN THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF THE FEDERAL' EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, FRANK PETRONE, ANNOUNCED THAT i
LILCO'S EMERGENCY PLAN DOES NOT PROVIDE REASONABLE ASSURANCE THAT THE PUBLIC WOULD BE PROTECTED IN THE EVENT OF A NUCLEAR ACCIDENT AT SHOREHAM.
IN SHORT, MR. PETRONE, SAID SHOREHAM SHOULD NOT BE LICENSED TO OPERATE.
SINCE FEBRUARY 1983, IT HAS BEEN CLEAR TO SUFFOLK COUNTY THAT THE OPERATION OF SHOREHAM WOULD CREATE A POTENTIAL DISASTER FOR THE PUBLIC.
AFTER EXTENSIVE AND COSTLY STUDIES, ANALYSES, AtlD SURVEYS, PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND A TRIP TO THE THREE MILE ISLAND VICINITY, THIS GOVERNMENT CONCLUDED THAT THE PUBLIC COULD NOT BE SAFELY EVACUATED OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED IF THERE WERE A SERIOUS ACCIDENT AT SHOREHAM.
THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT, HAVING BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING THE PUBLIC'S WELFARE, THEREFORE, HAD ONLY TWO CHOICES:
TELL THE PUBLIC THE TRUTH THAT THEY COULD NOT BE PROTECTED; OR DECEIVE THEM BY ADOPTING AN EMERGENCY PLAN THAT WOULD LULL THEM INTO BELIEVING THEY WERE BEING PROTECTED WHEN IN FACT THEY WERE NOT.
i i
.g.
1
._.___..__-....______1,._.____,__..
~
SUFFOLK COUNTY CHOSE WHAT IT WAS OBLIGATED TO DO:
IN RESOLUTION 111-1983, IT TOLD ITS CITIZENS THE TRUTH.
THUS, THE COUNTY RESOLVED NOT TO ADOPT OR IMPLEMENT AN EMERGENCY PLAN FOR TFiIS DECISION WAS UPHELD BY FEDERAL AND STATE COURTS.
SHOREHAM.
IT WAS ALSO UPHELD BY GOVERNOR CUOMO AFTER EXTENSIVE ANALYSES BY THE MARBURGER COMMISSION.
UNFORTUNATELY, LILCO HAS REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE FAdT THAT SHOREHAM SHOULD NOT OPERATE.
FOR INSTANCE, AFTER RESOLUTION 111-1983, WAS ADOPTED, THE COUNTY INFORMED THE NRC OF OUR ACTION, AND ASKED THAT AGENCY TO APPLY ITS REGULATIONS BY DENYING LILCO A LICENSE TO OPERATE SHOREHAM.
AT LILCO'S URGING, THE NRC REJECTED OUR REQUEST AND, INSTEAD, STARTED A 3-YEAR CONTORTED PROCESS OF GIVING LILCO CHANCE-AFTER-CHANCE TO CONCOCT A SCHEME BY WHICH TO LICENSE THE PLANT.
AT THE SAME TIME, LILCO LOBBIED TO ENLIST FEDERAL OFFICIALS TO SUPPORT LICENSING SHOREHAM.
LILCO'S SUCCESSES PEAKED LAST YEAR WHEN PRESIDENT REAGAN'S SECRETARY OF ENERGY ANNOUNCED THAT SHOREHAM SHOULD BE LICENSED TO OPERATE OVER THE OBJECTIONS OF SUFFOLK COUNTY AND NEW YORK STATE.
HE DID THIS IN THE FACE OF THE PRESIDENT'S OWN POLICY ON SHOREHAM, WRITTEN OCTOBER 11, 1984, THAT THE REAGAN ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT FAVOR THE IMPOSITION OF l.
FEDERAL AUTHORITY AT SHOREHAM OVER THE OBJECTIONS OF NEW YORK I
STATE AND SUFFOLK COUNTY.
l l
3 1
I...
~ -
- ' - ~ ~ - ~ ~
/
b I HAVE RECITED THIS BRIEF HISTORY TO BRING THE SHOREHAM SITUATION UP TO DATE.
BY NOW, EVERY FAIR-MINDED PERSON MUST REALIZE THAT SAFE EVACUATION OF THE PUBLIC WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE IF THERE WERE A SERIOUS NUCLEAR ACCIDENT AT SHOREHAM.
THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY ')F SUFFOLK COUNTY'S RESIDENTS AND ALMOST EVERY LONG ISLAND ELECTED OFFICIAL ARE OPPOSED TO THE LICENSING OF SHOREHAM.
AND BOTH THE NRC'S LICENSING AND APPEAL' BOARD' S HAVE REJECTED LILCO'S BID FOR A LICENSE.
BUT DESPITE ALL OF THIS, THE CASE IS NOT OVER.
WHY IS THAT7 THE REASON IS THAT LILCO PERSISTS IN TRYING TO LICENSE SHOREHAM AND IS NOW ORCHESTRATING THE BIGGEST DECEPTION OF ALL:
EVEN THOUGH THE NT:W YORK STATE SUPREME COURT AND THE NRC'S LICENSING AND APPEAL BOARDS HAVE Rf! LED THAT LILCO CANNOT IMPLEMENT ITS EMERGENCY PLAN, THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, AT LILCO'S URGING, IS CONSIDERING A LILCO REQUEST TO LICENSE SHOREHAM WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY IMPLEMENTABLE EMERGENCY PLAN.
THIS IS A PRESCRIPTION FOR DISASTER.
IN THE WAKE OF CHERNOBYL, IT IS A RECKLESS DISREGARD FOR THE SAFETY OF THE RESIDENTS OF LONG ISLAND.
SPECIFICALLY, LILCO IS PRESSING THE NRC TO LICENSE SHOREHAM ON THE BASIS OF A FICTION IT HAS CREATED AND DUBBED " REALISM. "
THIS FICTION GOES ON AS FOLLOWS:
SHOREHAM SHOULD BE LICENSED EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO IMPLEMENTABLE EMERGENCY PLAN, BECAUSE IF THE PLANT WERE LICENSED AND E THERE WERE AN ACCIDENT AT - - - - -
/
i SHOREHAM, THE STATE AND COUNTY WOULD IN REALITY ACT IN RESPONSE TV THE ACCIDENT AND THIS AD HOC " RESPONSE" WOULD SOMEHOW PROTECT THE PEOPLE.
LILCO ARGOES THAT THIS SET OF HYPOTHETICALS WOULD COMPLY WITH THE NRC'S REGULATIONS AND PROVIDE A BASIS FOR THE LICENSING OF SHOREHAM.
IT WOULD NOT.
LILCO'S FICTION IS ILLEGAL
~
AND ILLOGICAL; IT IS BORN OF CYNICISM AND INDIFFERENCE TO THE PUBLIC'S SAFETY.
FIRST, LILCO'S FICTION RETRIEVES THE DISCREDITED THEORY ON WHICH THE NRC LICENSED NUCLEAR PLANTS BEFORE THE THREE MILE ISLAND ACCIDENT.
THEN, THERE WAS NO PRE-PLANNING OR INTEGRATED PLANNING REQUIRED FOR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WITH THE UTILITY.
THE NRC SIMPLY ASSUMED THAT IF THERE WERE AN ACCIDENT, THE GOVERNMENTS WOULD KNOW HOW TO ACT ALONE AND WITH OTHERS IN RESPONSE.
THE THREE MILE ISLAND ACCIDENT PROVED THIS ASSUMPTION TO BE WRONG.
FOLLOWING THREE MILE ISLAND, CONGRESS PASSED LAWS
' AND THE NRC MADE REGULATIONS THAT REQUIRE PRE-PLANNING AND INTEGRATED PREPAREDNESS.
THERE IS NO PRE-PLANNING OR INTEGRATED i
PREPAREDNESS AT SHOREHAM.
SECOND, LILCO'S FICTION PRESUMES THAT STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS NOT ONLY WOULD RESPOND TO AN ACCIDENT, BUT THAT THEIR r
l RESPONSE WOULD WORK TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC.
THUS, LILCO CLAIMS, 1
THE PUBLIC WOULD BE PROTECTED EVEN THOUGH THE GOVERNMENTS HAVE NO l
i,
4 l
l L...--,._---_--.._...--
.s PRE-PLANNING, OR KNOWLEDGE OF INVENTORY OF AVAILABLE RESOURCES, NO PERSONNEL READINESS, AND NO TRAINING.
SUCH A PRESUMPTION IS UNFOUNDED; FARCICAL AT BEST.
THIRD, LILCO'S FICTION PORTRAYS SUFFOLK COUNTY ACTING IN CONCERT WITH LILCO IF THERE WERE AN ACCIDENT AT SHOREHAM.
HOWEVER, COUNTY LAW PROHIBITS COUNTY PERSONNEL FROM IMPLEMENTING LILCO'S EMERGENCY PLAN.
EVEN IF IT DID NOT, THE COUNTY COULD NOT RESPONSIBLY ACT IN CONCERT WITH LILCO AND ITS EMERGENCY PLAN.
THE COUNTY'S STUDIES, ANALYSES, AND SURVEYS, TOGETHER WITH OUR DAY-TO-DAY EXPERIENCES ON LONG ISLAND WITH THE LIMITED ROAD NETWORK AND THE CONFINED GEOGRAPHY, HAVE CONVINCED US THAT SAFE EVACUATION OF THE PUBLIC IS NOT POSSIBLE IN A SHOREHAM ACCIDENT.
LILCO'S EMERGENCY PLAN IS A GUIDELINE FOR TRAFFIC-JAM GRIDLOCK AND AN IMMOBILIZED EVACUATION WHERE HUNDREDS OF THOUSAND OF LONG ISLAND'S RESIDENTS WOULD BE TRAPPED TO ABSORB THE RADIATION THEY SOUGHT TO FLEE.
THIS COUNTY WOULD NOT ACT IN CONCERT WITH SUCH A GUIDELINE FOR DISASTER.
FOURTH, LILCO'S FICTION RESTS ON THE SURMISE THAT THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE CONFIDENCE IN LILCO, OR THAT IT WOULD RELY ON LILCO BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE NO ONE ELSE ON WHICH TO RELY.
THIS IS FALSE.
THERE IS NO CORPORATION ON LONG ISLAND WITH SO LOW A STANDING WITH THE PUBLIC AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AS LILCO.
THERE IS EVEN A STRONG AND CREDIBLE EFFORT TODAY TO EFFECT A PUBLIC 6-
TAKEOVER OF THIS COMPANY.
IN AN EMERGENCY OR OTHERWISE, THE PUBLIC AND THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT WOULD HAVE NO CONFIDENCE IN LILCO.
WE COULD NOT, AND WOULD NOT, LOOK TO SUCH A DISCREDITED SOURCE FOR GUIDANCE OR ASSISTANCE IN A NUCLEAR ACCIDENT.
- INDEED, LILCO WOULD BE THE OBJECT OF THE PUBLIC'S WRATH BECAUSE IT CAUSED THE ACCIDENT.
IT WOULD BE THE ENTITY WHICH STEAMROLLED SHOREHAM INTO OPERATION OVER THE PUBLIC AND GOVERNMENTS' OBJECTIONS.
IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WOULD BETTER SERVE THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST TO ACT ALONE THAN TO ENTRUST THE PUBLIC WEAL TO MORE OF LILCO'S POOR JUDGMENTS.
MOREOVER, LILCO'S RESPONSE TO HURRICANE GLORIA LAST OCTOBER LIVES INDELIBLY AS A LESSON TO EVERYONE ON LONG ISLAND.
IN THE POTENTIALLY CATASTROPHIC CIRCUMSTANCES OF A NUCLEAR ACCIDENT, WE WOULD NEVER RELY UPON OR ACT IN CONCERT WITH A COMPANY THAT COULD NOT EVEN PUT THE LIGHTS BACK ON FOR DAYS.
FIFTH, LILCO'S FICTION HAS PROMPTED THE COMPANY TO EXTEND ITS PLEAS FOR LICENSING SHOREHAM M SHAMEFUL LIMITS.
ON JUNE 11, 1986, LILCO'S COUNSEL WROTE THE NRC, CLAIMING THAT STATE LAW REQUIRES THE COUNTY TO TAKE ACTIONS IN AN EMERGENCY THAT PURPORTEDLY WOULD JUSTIFY THE NRC PUTTING SHOREHAM INTO OPERATION.
THIS CLAIM MISSTATES THE LAW.
IT WOULD NEVER BE
" APPROPRIATE" OR "NECESSARY" FOR THE COUNTY TO TAKE ACTIONS IN PURSUIT OF LILCO'S ILLEGAL EMERGENCY PLAN.
7
6 4
FINALLY, IN THE SAME LEffER OF JUNE 11, LILCO ENSHRINES ITS FICTION WITH THE FOLLOWING WORDS:
...THE LILCO PLAN PROVIDES A BASIS FOR A PRIVATE / GOVERNMENTAL PARTNERSHIP THAT COULD AND WOULD BE EFFECTIVE TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC IN A REAL EMERGENCY, WHEN POLITICAL POSTURING WOULD BE ABANDONED AND THE SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC WOULD BE GIVEN PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE."
THIS IS MORE FANTASY.
I REITERATE WHAT IS IN ESSENCE STATED ABOVE:
NEITHER SUFFOLK COUNTY NOR I AS COUNTY EXECUTIVE HAS ANY " PARTNERSHIP" WITH LILCor THERE IS NO " BASIS FOR A PRIVATE / GOVERNMENTAL PARTNERSHIP" OF ANY KIND WITH LILCor THE COUNTY HAS NO CONFIDENCE OR TRUST IN LILCor AND IN AN EMERGENCY, THE COUNTY WOULD GIVE NO CREDENCE TO LILCO OR ITS PLAN AND WOULD NOT WORK IN CONCERT WITH LILCO.
INDEED, IN AN EMERGENCY, THE PUBLIC OF SUFFOLK COUNTY --
SHOWN BY RESPECTED POLLS TO OPPOSE SHOREHAM BY MORE THAN 75 PERCENT -- COULD NOT TRUST THEIR OWN GOVERNMENTS OFFICIALS IF WE, IN TURN, LOOKED TO THE DISCREDITED LILCO FOR GUIDANCE OR ADVICE.
TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT LILCO'S MISCHARACTERIZATIONS OF MY POSITION ARE BROUGHT TO AN END, I SHALL TRANSMIT A COPY OF THIS j
STATEMENT TO LILCO, THE NRC, AND FEMA.
I SHALL ALSO EXPRESSLY NULLIFY MY JUNE 26, 1985 LETTER TO LILCO'S COUNSEL AND SHALL RESCIND EXECUTIVE ORDER 2-1985.
BOTH OF THESE DOCUMENTS HAVE i
EFFECTIVELY BEEN NULLIFIED BY EARLIER ACTIONSt HOWEVER, LILCO'S PERSISTENT MISSTATEMENTS (SUCH AS IN ITS JUNE 11 LETTER) PROMPT ME TO CLEAR THE SLATd SO THAT NO PERSON CAN CONCOCT FURTHER
/
FICTIONS.
I AM ALSO DESIGNATING CHIEF DEPUTY COUNTY EXECUTIVE FRANK JONES, AS MY REPRESENTATIVE, TO FOLLOW THESE MATTERS AND TO COORDINATE AS NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE WITH THE COUNTY LEGISLATURE AND WITH THE ATTORNEYS HANDLING SHOREHAM MATTERS.
j LILCO HAS LOBBIED IN WASHINGTON AND ELSEWHERE TO CHARACTERIZE SHOREHAM AS A LITMUS TEST FOR NUCLEAR POWER.
- THUS, LILCO SEEKS TO TRANSFORM THE SHOREHAM CASE INTO THE SHOREHAH CAUSE.
THIS IS A DECEPTION.
SUFFOL7" COUNTY IS NOT ANTI-NUCLEAR, AND WE HAVE NO SUCH POLICY.
INDEED, BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL j
LABORATORY IS IN OUR MIDST.
THE COUNTY IS SIMPLY IN FAVOR OF DOING WHAT WE WERE ELECTED BY OUR CITIZENS TO DO:
TO PROTECT THEIR WELL-BEING AND TO BE TRUTHFUL.
LILCO DOES NOT LIKE THIS, BECAUSE THE RESULT PUTS THE COUNTY AGAINST THE MISTAKE LILCO MADE AT SHOREHAM.
BUT IN A DEMOCRACY, THE PUBLIC GOOD CANNOT BE i
DISREGARDED.
SHOREHAM IS A MISTAKEr GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT
{
COMPOUND THE MISTAKE OF HAVING PERMITTED SHOREHAM TO BE BUILT l
WITH THE MISTAKE OF LETTING SHOREHAM OPERATE.
THE SHOREHAM CONTROVERSY IIAS OVER THE PAST FOUR YEARS GROWN TO CONFLICT AND CONFRONTATION.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WE RELISH.
TO STEP BACK FROM THE TRENCHES AND VIEW THE BROADER SCALE, ONE CAN ONLY WISH THAT LILCO HAD SEIZED THE OPPROTUNITY TO ABANDON SHOREHAM IN 1983 OR EVEN SOONER, WHEN THE INVESTMENT WAS BILLIONS I
LESS.
WE WOULD STILL WELCOME SUCH A LILCO DECISION TODAY.
9
a
.)
t BUT, THE FACT IS THAT WE HAVE A FIGHT ON OUR HANDS.
LILCO REMAINS BLIND TO THE REALITY WHY SHOREHAM SHOULD NOT OPERATE.
TO LILCO, CHERNOSYL NEVER HAPPENED, FEMA'S REGIONAL DIRECTOR NEVER RESIGNED OVER SHOREHAM, THE WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF NEVER ADMITTED LONG ISLAND CANNOT BE EVACUATED, SUFFOLK COUNTY DID NOT WIN COURT VICTORIES UPHOLDING THE LEGALITY OF THE COUNTY'S POLICIES ON SHOREHAM, AND LONG ISLAND'S GEOGRAPHY IS NO DIFFERENT FROM ANYWHERE ELSE.
INDEED, LILCO IS EVEN IMPERVIOUS TO THE OUTPOURING OF OPPOSITION TO SHOREHAM FROM EVERY CORNER OF LONG ISLAND.
VIRTUALLY EVERY ELECTED OFFICIAL OPPOSES SHOREHAM, THE GOVERNOR OPPOSES SHOREHAM, AND THE PUBLIC OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSES SHOREHAM.
I REMAIN CONFIDENT THAT SUFFOLK COUNTY WILL PREVAIL.
WE ARE RIGHT, AND WE HAVE THE PUBLIC'S UNYIELDING SUPPORT. THE REASON IS l
THAT A BASIC TRUTH HAS DRIVEN THIS COUNTY FROM TI!E START:
IT WOULD NOT DE POSSIBLE TO EVACUATE OR OTHERWISE PROTECT THE PUBLIC l
IF THERE WERE A SERIOUS NUCLEAR ACCIDENT AT THE SHOREHAM PLANT.
SHOREHAM SHOULD NOT OPEN.
~10-t
kntre. Rec.No. 1196-83
- c. Introduced by Legisloters Wehronborg, Coreccppa, D' Andro, Geico, Allgrovo, Bachat
. Prc pect, Folcy, Nolcn, B1000, Rizzo, LcBun, Davino, Hariton, Beck RESOLUTION NO. 111 - 1983, CONSTITUTING THE FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS OF SUFFOLK COUNTY ON WHETHER A LEVEL OF EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS TO RESPOND TO A RADIOLOGICAL ACCIDENT AT THE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION CAN PROTECT THE HEALTH, WELFARE AND SAFETY OF THE RESIDENTS OF SUFFOLK COUNTY WHEREAS, Suffolk County has a duty under the Constitution of the State of N;w York, the New York State Municipal Home Rule Law, and the suffolk County Charter to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Suffolk Ccunty; and
- UHEREAS, the Long Island Lighting Company ("LILCO") is constructing a'nd doaires to operate the shoreham Nuclear Power Station ("Shoreham"),
located on tha north. shore of Long Island near the town of Wading River, a location which is within the boundaries of Suffolk County; and
- WHEREAS, a
serious' huclear accident at Shoreham could result in the rolcose of significant qua'ntities of radioactive fission products; and
- WHEREAS, the release of such radlation would pose a severe hazard to the hoolth, safety, and welfare of Suffolk County residents; and
- UHEREAS, in recognition of the effects of such potential hazard posed by Shoroham on the duty of Suffolk County to protect the
- health, safety, and welfare of its citizens, this Legislature on March 23, 1982, adopted Resolution No. 262-1982, which directed that suf folk County prepare a " County Radiological Em3rgency Response Plan to serve the interest of the safety, health, and welfare of the citizans of Suffolk County.."; and WHEREAS, in Resolution 262-1982, the Legislature determined that the plan dOvoloped by the County "shall not be operable and shall not be deemed adequate cnd capable of being implemented until such time as it is approved by the Suffolk County Legislature"; and
- WHEREAS, in adopting Resolution 262-1982, the Legislature found that oorlier planning efforts by LILCO and County planners (the
" original planning dota')
were inadequate because they failed to address the particular problems poced by conditions on Long Island and further failed to account for human b3havior during a
radiological emergency and the lessons of the accident at Thrco Mile Island; and
- WHEREAS, on March 29, 1982, Peter F. Cohalan, Suffolk County Executive, ccting to implement Rosolution 262-1982, by Executive Order established the Suffolk County Radiological Emergency
Response
Plan Steering Committee
("Stoering Committee") and directed it to prepare a County plan for submittal to tho County Executive and County Legislature; and WHEREAS, the Steering Committee assembled a group of highly qualified and notionhlly recognized experts from diverse disciplines to prepare such County plcn; and f
__-=
~
i
- WHEREAS, such highly qualifico exporto worksd, in a
diligent end ccnceicntious offort at a coct in excoca of
$500,000 to prcpara tha baot poscible plan for suffolk County, and particularly to ensure that such plan took 4
- j. into account all particular physical and behavioral conditions on Long Island that affect the adequacy of the emergency response plan; and
/
l WHEREAS, the analyses, studies, and surveys of such experts included:
I
{
(a)
Detailed analyses of the possible releases of radiation from Shoreham; I
(b)
Detailed analyses of the radiological health consequences of such radiation release on the population of Suffolk
- County, giventhe meterological, demographic, topographical, and other specific i
local conditions on Long Island; 4
l (c) k detailed social survey of Long Island residents to determine l
and assess their intended behavior in the event of a
serious j
accident at Shoreham; (d)'
A detailed survey of school bus drivers, volunteer firemen, and certain othey, emergency response personnel to determine whether emergency. personnel intend to report promptly for emergency duties, or. instead to unite with their own families, in the event of a serious accident at Shoreham; 1
}
(e)
Detailed estimates of the number of persons who would be ordered to evacuate in the event of a serious accident at
- Shoreham, as well as the number of persons who intend to evacuate voluntarily even if not ordered to do so; (f)
Detailed analyses of the road network in Long Island and the time required to evacuate persons from areas affected by radiation i
releases;
)
(g)
Detailed analyses of the protective actions available to Suffolk County residents to evacuate or take shelter from such radiation releases; and (h)
Analysis
- of the lessons learned from the accident at Three Mile l
Island on local government responsibilities to prepare for a
j radiological emergency; and 1
}
WHE RE AS, on May 10, 1982, LILCO, without the approval or authorization of j
tho suffolk County Government, submitted to the New York State Disaster Preparedness Commisasion
("DPC")
two volumes entitled "Suffolk County '
i l
ocRadiological Emergency Response Plan" and containing the original planning data, further revised and supplemented by LILCO, and requested the DPC to review j
ond approve such LILCo submittal as the local radiological emergency responso !
i plan for suttolk County; and l
i j
- UHEREAS, in Resolutions 456-1982 and 457-1982, the County further Shoreham and i l
cddressed the matter of preparing for a radiological emergency at 4
omphas,12ed that:
4 (a)
The LILCo-submitted document was not and will not be the County's Radiological Emergency Response Plan; and u
(b)
ThJ CLunty's RadiolCgical Emerg:ncy RJcponCO Plcnning Policy, c3 Cnuncictcd in RJCclution 456-1982, 10 cc folicw3:
Suffolk County shall not assign funds or personnel to test or implement any radiological emergency response plan for the Shoreham Nuclear Plant unless that plan has been fully developed to the best of the County's ability.
Suffolk County shall not assign funds or personnel to test or implement any radiological emergency response plan for the Shoreham Nuclear Plant unless that plan has been subject of at least two public hearings, one to be held in Riverhead, and one to be held in Hauppauge.
Suffolk County shall not assign funds or personnel to test or implement any radiological emergency response plan for the hhoreham Nuclear Plant unless that plan has been approved, after public hearings, by the Suffolk County Legislature and the County Executive; and
- WHEREAS, on June 9, 1982, the DPC rejected the LILCO-submitted document fer the reason that it was deficient; and
- WHEREAS, on October 6,
- 1982, LILCO, again without the approval or cuthorization of the Suffolk County Government, submitted to the DPC an amended varcion of the previously submitted LILCO document which had been rejected by thO DPC; and
- WHEREAS, on December 2,
1982, the Draft County Radiological Emergency RJcponse Plan authorized by Resolution 262-1982 was submitted to the County Logiclature for review and public hearings as specified in Resolutions 262-1982, 456-1982, and 457-1982; and
- WHEREAS, in January
- 1983, the Legislature held hearings on the Draft County plan, which hearings included:
(a)
More than 1,590 pages of transcripts; (b)
Detailed written statements and oral testimony of County expert consultan'ts who prepared the Draft County plan; (c)
Detailed written statements and oral testimony of LILCO of ficials and expert consultants retained by LILCO; (d)
Detailed written statements and oral testimony of the Suffolk County Police Department, the County Health Department, the County Social Services department, and the County Public Works Department, all of which would have indispensable roles in responding to a radiological emergency at Shoreham; (e)
Detailed written statements and oral testimony of organizations in Suffolk County concerned with radiological emergency preparedness; and
- ( f)
Extensive presentations by hundreds of members of the general public; and I
1
- WHEREAS, members or tho LIgiolaturo alco trcvollcd to cnd hold public hanrings in tho vicinity of tha Three Milo Island Nuclear Power Plant to gcin
,,information on tha lessons to be lesrned by local governmsnts from tho tecident ct Three Mile Island; and
- WHEREAS, the Draft County plan identifies evacuation and protective chaltering as the two primary protective actions which would need to be impicmented in the event of a serious accident at Shoreham; and
- WHEREAS, evacuation of Suffolk County residents in the event of a rcdiological emergency could take as much time as 14-30 hours because of various
- fcctors, including:
the limited number of appropriate evacuation routes in Suffolk County; difficulties in mobilizing police and other emergency personnel; difficulties ensuing from spontaneous evacuation of large numbers of County rccidents, thus creating severe traffic congestion; and unavilability of citornate evacuation routes for persons residing east of Shoreham and thus the n:cocsity for shch persons during an evacuation.to pass by the plant and pocaibly through the radioactive plume; and a
- WHEREAS, evacuation times in excess of 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> and certainly l cvecuation times in the range of 14-30 hours will result in virtual immobilization of evacuation and high exposure of evacuees to radiation such that evacuees' health, safety *, and welfare would not be protected; and WHEREA.S, protectiIve sheltering is designed to protect persons from cxcocsive radiation exposure by such persons staying indoors until radiation with the greatest danger to health has passed; and
- WHEREAS, if protective sheltering were ordered for suffolk County residents, unacceptable radiation exposure would still be experienced by subotantial portions of the suffolk County population, thus making it impossible to provide for the health, welf a re, and safety of these residents; and
- WHEREAS, the document submitted by LILCO to the DPC without County opproval or authorization is deficient because it does not deal with the actual loccl conditions, physical and behavioral, on Long Island that would be oncountered during a serious nuclear accident at Shoreham; and
- WHEREAS, the document submitted by LILCO to the DPC without County opproval or authorization does not ensure that effective protective action by parcons subject to radiation exposure, in the form of evacuation or sheltering, would be taken in event of a serious nuclear accident at Shoreham, and thus such document, even if implemented, would not protect the health, safety, and welf are of Suffolk County residents; and
- WHEREAS, the extensive data which the Legislature has considered make cloer that the site-specific circumstances and actual local conditions existing 1i on Long
- Island, particularly its elongated eas t/ we st configuration which roquires all evacuation routes from locations east of the plant to pass within a zona of predicted high radiation, the inef fectiveness of protective sheltering, tho cevere traffic congestion likely to be experienced if a partial or complete
- ovocuation were
- ordered, and the difficulties in ensuring that emergency I
personnel will promptly report for emergency
- duties, preclude any emergency rocponse
- plan, if implemented, from providing adequate preparedness to protect tho he%1th, welfare, and safety of Suf folk County residents; now, therefore, be it t
I
- RESOLVED, thSt tho arOft County plcn cubmittco to tho County Lcgiolaturo Cn DecOmber 2, 1982, if impicm:ntcd, would not prottet tho hoolth, welfaro, and C3foty tf Suffolk County rOcid0nto cnd thua 10 not opprov;d and will not ba
'impirmented; and be it further
- RESOLVED, that the document submitted by LILCO to the DPC without the County approval or futhorization, if implemented, would not protect the
- health, welfore, and safety of Suffolk residents and thus will not be approved and will n:t be implemented; and be it further
- RESOLVED, that since no local radiological emergency response plan for a ccrious nuclear accident at Shoreham will protect the
- health, welf are, and cafoty of Suffolk County residents, and since the preparation and implementation of cny such plan would be misleading to the public by indicating to County racidents that their health, welfare, and safety are being protected when, in fcct, such is not the case, the County's radiological emergency planning process 10 hereby terhinated, and no local radiological emergency plan for response to cn cccident at the Shoreham plant shall be adopted or implemented; and be it further
- RESOLVED, that since no radiological emergency plan can protect the hoolth, welfare, safety of Suffolk County residents and, since no radiological cmargency plan shall be ' adopted or implemented by Suffolk County, the County Ex cutive is hereby direc,ted to take all actions necessary to assure that cctions taken by any other governmental agency, be it State or Federal, are consistent with the decisions mandated by this Resolution.
DATED: February 17, 1983 APP BY:
?_ !
%+
Coune7 Executive of Suf folk County Date of Approval c,7 3
73 l
l
8, '
t i
January 23, 1987 dF 87 JAN 28 A9 57 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION LFt' Atomic Safety and Licensinc Board 00co ' ns -
)
In the Matter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-5
)
(EP Exercise)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the letter (with its enclosures) from Michael A. LoGrande, Acting County Executive, County of Suffolk, to Victor Stello, Executive Director for Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission have been served on the following this 23rd day of January 1987 by U.S. mail, first class.
John H.
Frye, III, Chairman Admin. Judge B.
Paul Cotter, Jr.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Panel 4350 East West Highway U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Bethesda, Maryland 20814 4350 East West Highway Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Dr. Oscar H.
Paris Mr. Frederick J.
Shon Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 i
I
I I
t Morton B. Margulies, Esq.
Dr. Jerry R.
Kline Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Lando W.
Zech, Jr., Chairman Comm. James K. Asselstine U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Room 1113 Room 1136 1717 H Street, N.W.
1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Comm. Frederick M. Bernthal Comm. Kenneth M. Carr U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Room 1156 1717 H Street, N.W.
1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Comm. Thomas M. Roberts W'lliam C. Parler, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Room 1103 10th Floor 1717 H Street, N.W.
1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 William R. Cumming, Esq.
Anthony F.
Earley, Jr., Esq.
Spence W. Perry, Esq.
General Counsel Office of General Counsel Long Island Lighting Company Federal Emergency Management Agency 175 East Old Country Road 500 C Street, S.W.,
Room 840 Hicksville, New York 11801 Washington, D.C.
20472 Ms. Elisabeth Taibbi W. Taylor Reveley, III, Esq.
Hunton & Williams Clerk Suffolk County Legislature P.O. Box 1535 Suffolk County Legislature 707 East Main Street Office Building Richmond, Virginia 23212 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11788 Mr. L. F. Britt Stephen B. Latham, Esq.
Long Island Lighting Company Twomey, Latham & Shea Shoreham Nuclear Power Station 33 West Second Street North Country Road Riverhead, New York 11901 Wading River, New York 11792 Ms. Nora Bredes Docketing and Service Section Executivd Director Office of the Secretary Shoreham Opponents Coalition U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
195 East Main Street 1717 H Street, N.W.
Smithtown, New York 11787 Washington, D.C.
20555
a A
t Michael A. LoGrande Mary M. Gundrum, Esq.
New York State Department of Law Acting Suffolk County Executive 120 Broadway, 3rd Floor H. Lee Dennison Building Veterans Memorial Highway Room 3-116 New York, New York 10271 Hauppauge, New York 11788 MHB Technical Associates Dr. Monroe Schneider 1723 Hamilton Avenue North Shore Committee P.O. Box 231 Suite K San Jose, California 95125 Wading River, New York 11792 Martin Bradley Ashare, Esq.
Fabian G. Palomino, Esq.
Suffolk County Attorney Special Counsel to the Governor Bldg. 158 North County Complex Executive Chamber, Rm. 229 Veterans Memorial Highway State Capitol Hauppauge, New York 11788 Albany, New York 12224 Mr. Jay Dunkleburger Mr. Stuart Diamond New York State Energy Office Business / Financial NEW YORK TIMES Agency Building 2 229 W. 43rd Street Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223 New York, New York 10036 David A. Brownlee, Esq.
Bernard M. Bordenick, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Kirkpatrick & Lockhart 1500 Oliver Building Washington, D.C.
20555 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222 Mr. Philip McIntire Federal Emergency Management Agency 26 Federal Plaza New York, New York 10278 Nr
- kn Lawrence Coe Lanpher" KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART 1800 M Street, N.W.
South Lobby - 9th Floor Warhington, D.C.
20036-5891 l
l l
__